Oddly, I suppose, I think we get an amazing bargain with the salaries we pay our Washington officials (Executive, Legislative and Judicial) considering the high cost of living in DC. It should never be the goal of anyone in public service to get rich doing the people’s work. However, we don’t need to make it so little they are easily tempted either. Perhaps such servants salaries can be tied to “similar” functions in the private sector? I don’t know how. That is why we have DOGE!
I do NOT like linking legislative salaries to the states’ demographics, however. It is the JOB not the place represented. Things like a residence, transportation etc. maybe. Some like Joe Biden, commute home every day by train. Others have to fly thousands of miles. Some reps have large families that live in DC with them. Some have families that stay home most of the time but visit often. Some are single. I don’t like them “living” in their offices - it isn’t healthy, mentally or physically. Maybe we should convert some unused office space to apartments for Representatives and Senators and their “hometown” DC staff?
However, as to investments, other than ones’ private residence, ALL investments while serving should be via a blind trust managed by professional investment advisors vetted by the ? department (Treasury, Justice, etal) for the elected/appointed official and immediate family members (spouse, children, define to what level) and, for all other family relations and businesses/associates, annual reports to an appropriate agency/office for review and investigation. But, no such advisor should have ANY business or personal relationship with the public servant client. For example, I formerly worked for a large broker/dealer and my retirement plan is managed by their advisors. Were I elected to congress (perish the thought) my investments should all go elsewhere as available from whomever manages those folks for the government but not my former employer under any circumstances. It must be arms length. But investment advisors must understand their clients needs and wishes. Such as no businesses that do business in Greenland(?).
While the rules and procedures cannot impinge upon the choices of ANY citizen to provide for their financial wellbeing they must require disclosure of family, friends and assiciates to avoid temptations.
As to expenses of public servants and their immediate families, it is fair that such people be compensated as appropriate to their tasks and situation. For example, all Senators should receive the same basic compensation. However, perhaps variable compensation, such as travel home from time to time should be standardized as to occasions, distance and mode of travel. Accomodations may be provided by the state represented, the individual if so desired (but at the individual’s risk), and certainly the best advantage possible should be made of government travel when available. For example, a lot of military flights are done for training purposes. Perhaps these flights can be coordinated to provide convenient, though hardly elegant, transportation to officials and staff as available. Having flow a few times as “cargo” on C-130’s and similar aircraft, I can tell you it is less than “tourist” class but safe and secure. Andrews AFB is certainly as convenient as the commercial airports are.
States providing housing is certainly an alternative but somewhat problematic given family sizes, current environments, etc. And the accomodations needed for representatives on two year terms are different than senators on six year terms.
Messy any way you go about it. Maybe a few apartment houses just for legislators and hometown staff? Repurposing some of the unused office space in DC and environs??
Has anyone studied how other countries handle this sort of problem, especially large ones like Canada, Russia, China, Austrailia, India, Brazil, etc. and other democracies regardless of size. Sort of like a “best practices” synopsys?
That’s it. My $.02 on the subject. Constructive responses welcome. General nitpicking and redicule, NOT.